There is an easy way to turn a major global event into a permanent political case: add a symbol to the security arrangements. The US decision to provide an ICE/HSI presence within the perimeter of Milan-Cortina 2026 is doing exactly that: it shifts the centre of gravity from risk management to perception management, with potentially counterproductive effects on public order.

According to what has been reconstructed in the last few hours, the United States will set up its own ‘operations room’ at the Consulate in Milan with representatives of American agencies interested in the event; within that perimeter there will also be experts from Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), the ICE investigation unit, with support and liaison tasks, in particular through database consultation and information cooperation, without operational attributions on Italian territory. This is the line reiterated by the Viminale after the meeting between Minister Matteo Piantedosi and US Ambassador Tilman J. Fertitta, with the minister’s commitment to provide a briefing to the Chamber of Deputies on 4 February.

Technically, the point seems clear: these are not ‘agents on the street’. And in fact, on a strictly procedural level, it is a practice for highly sensitive delegations (particularly American ones) to supplement their security and information exchange structures, especially at major events.

But the political point – and this is where the matter changes nature – is that ‘ICE’ is a toxic brand right now, inside and outside the United States. The public debate cannot be expected to distinguish between investigative HSI and ICE, which is now associated in the public imagination with the immigration crackdown and the unjustified murders of Renee Nicole Good and Alex Pretti.

It is on this fracture – between ‘technical’ reassurance and ‘political’ detonation – that Ettore Rosato, deputy of Azione and secretary of Copasir, intervened today. In a press note, Rosato observes that “the Viminale’s clarifications are technically reassuring”, but that by now the issue has taken on such a rate of politicisation that a step backwards is advised: “beyond the merit and the tasks that will be assigned to the agents, it is now clear that the very presence of the ICE risks triggering protests and demonstrations that are certainly not in the interest of the Olympic Games and among the security objectives of the athletes and delegations present”. And he concludes: ‘The affair suggests to both the American and Italian governments to renounce the presence of ICE agents in Italy’.

The reasoning is straightforward: if the objective is to reduce the risk, introducing a factor that ‘raises the temperature’ of the square is a mistake. The Olympics, especially with top political presences, are already a magnet for protests and instrumentalisation. Adding an identity theme – as ICE is now – means offering those who want to turn the Games into an arena a perfect target: simple, recognisable, polarising.

Rosato’s ‘realistic’ conclusion is that, even if the HSI presence remained confined to a consular control room, the political and public order cost could outweigh the operational benefit. If the aim is really to protect delegations and athletes, the most effective solution might be what the Copasir exponent suggests: defusing the fuse. Coordination and information exchange can be done in other ways – more discreet, more easily explained, less flammable. Because it is one thing to secure an event. It is another to turn it into a permanent referendum on Trump and America.